[aur-general] AUR activity log?

Justin Dray justin at dray.be
Wed Aug 12 17:42:11 UTC 2015

On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 03:36 Giancarlo Razzolini <grazzolini at gmail.com> wrote:

Em 12-08-2015 14:21, Justin Dray escreveu:
> But by 'hidden' it also deletes all comments and votes, and stops
> people being able to search for the package, see that it isn't
> maintained and picking it up.

Well, the TU could have waited, I give you that.

> Almost all of my packages have become mine by trying to install
> something, finding it useful, and when it became an orphan, just
> taking it over and fixing it up.

This is how I ended up maintaining quite a few packages. But I didn't
waited for them to become orphan, in most cases.

> If we wanted to delete packages we would have asked for deletion, not
> orphaned it. What is the point of orphaning packages if they are just
> going to get deleted anyway?

Now this is were I fail to see the point. If you still wanted/needed the
package, why orphan it? I'm perfectly happy with the way AUR works
today. But, if you guys really want orphaned packages to stay around for
some time, I suggest you guys implement it and send a diff. Perhaps
something that prevents even a TU from deleting (hiding) a orphaned
package that isn't orphan long enough, lets say, a couple of months.

Giancarlo Razzolini

Perhaps seeing active comments or that the packages had to have been
updated within month since everything was cleared for AUR4?

We already have a mechanism for disowning a package and allowing others to
maintain it without deleting it. It's called orphaning. The problem here is
that how they are treated has apparently changed with no community
involvement or even a warning that orphan packages will be deleted at

Perhaps if TUs are able to view the last updated time from a search fable,
they could see an orphaned package with no updates for X months. But as has
been said  before, orphaned does not mean useless or broken.

- Justin

More information about the aur-general mailing list